Azure DevOps Server (formerly TMS) Formerly Team Foundation Server vs Perforce Helix Core

• Organizes tasks with space for all the added context one would need (requirements, design links, etc.)
• Ability to capture a backlog of items to better visualize a roadmap to help with planning/prioritizing.
• Streamlines the work being done across a large project team with various specialists.
• Intuitive to use with minimal learning curve for those new to the tool.

Read full review

• The branching mechanisms in Perforce allow for an enormous codebase to be duplicated into release versions weekly with little impact upon things such as the speed of queries against the version control.
• Action triggers permit such things as automated builds of software versions, dynamic messaging when issues are identified either within or prior to a build process, and much more.
• Locking provides the ability to prevent modifications of stable, tested versions in order to ensure validity when they are released.

Read full review

• Can add more build templates for specific technology requirements
• Can have more features in dashboards which can help dev teams stream line their tasks and priorities
• Can have raise alarm feature in case of any sort of failure in devops pipeline execution

Read full review

• Perforce tends to feel backwards in how it approaches certain tasks, like branching and integrating - even once you figure out how it wants you to perform these tasks, you will likely forget when it comes around to the next time you need to do them again.
• Perforce has a higher price tag, comparatively.
• Perforce make some tasks very easy, and yet other tasks very difficult - it doesn't always seem to have found its target user's proficiency.

Read full review

• There has been a positive impact on our overall business objectives. We have saved a huge amount of time consolidating user stories and bugs into one central location.
• The system has increased visibility into our processes which has additionally had a positive impact on our business objectives. It has increased confidence in the process and allowed us to have more flexibility around the project.

Read full review

• Decreased our implementation costs by allowing versioning and back out of customizations made in the field.
• saves developers time through automation of changes between branches - they think less of the plumbing and have more time to write code.
• Downside is training/managing expectations of new developers who come in assuming they will use Git.

Read full review